Guest BionicRedneck Report post Posted February 2, 2004 He was much more than "decent" at his peak. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Trivia247 Report post Posted February 2, 2004 He was much more than "decent" at his peak. I mean Decent meaning his Last half year of active wrestling work obviously he was greater earlier Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest wildpegasus Report post Posted February 2, 2004 She said it happened more than once. He didn't. He has been married before (twice?) and has never had such a problem. Seems odd he would just start randomly beating his third wife for no reason at all. We'll never know what happened and I don't mean to diss Austin here since I like to give people the benifit of the dobut but I feel that someone needs to defend Debra. Your post came off as sounding like it was Debra's doing. Remember, Austin is a drunk. There are just too many coincidences. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Masked Man of Mystery 0 Report post Posted February 2, 2004 I never thought Austin was anything special in the ring. He somehow got over on the mic(frankly, looking back at it, I'm amazed the Attitude stuff worked at all), and well, I've seen him way back when he had hair in World Class Championship Wrestling and I've seen him in matches oh, I'd say '98 and forward. I never saw much in him. But then, no one ever called Hulk Hogan a technical genius either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ray Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Hopefully these same rules apply to Scott Hall as well... Maybe if Hall were as great as Austin... I never thought Austin was anything special in the ring. He somehow got over on the mic(frankly, looking back at it, I'm amazed the Attitude stuff worked at all), and well, I've seen him way back when he had hair in World Class Championship Wrestling and I've seen him in matches oh, I'd say '98 and forward. I never saw much in him. You're watching the wrong Austin then. Austin was at his best in 96-97. Of course, he experienced a revival in 2001...which you should have seen since it's post-98. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JasonX 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Austin was at his best in 96-97. Of course, he experienced a revival in 2001... The shittiness of his heel run, with him burying the WCW and ECW guys on a regular basis coupled with the fact that it took a massive terrorist attack to make Austin put someone over (Kurt Angle) after having him pointlessly going over just about everyone on the roster not named HHH made 2001 Austin's worst year by far..... If Austin had done the right thing and jobbed his ass off in 2001 to get Jericho, Angle, and Benoit over, it would be considered a revival. But as it is, 2001 was the year that everyone got their first look at what a selfish piece of shit Austin was.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BionicRedneck Report post Posted February 3, 2004 You're an idiot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lomasmoney 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Well if I have my facts straight Austin was going to job the belt to Benoit at KOTR 2001, but the whole Benoit fucking his neck up and having to miss a year of ring time fucked that up. Come to think of it injuries really fucked up the WWF/Alliance angle. Does anyone know what HHH would have done if he had not been hhhurt that year. Same for Benoit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Ghost of bps21 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 I'm sure HHH would have helped put everyone over. That's what HHH does you know. Too bad he had to miss it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JumpinJackFlash Report post Posted February 3, 2004 QUOTE (JasonX @ Feb 1 2004, 10:47 PM) http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2003560...4050033,00.html Among topics that the drunken wifebeating no-talent hack lies about: He left the WWE in 2002 because of "health problems" instead of him being a baby and not wanting to do ANYTHING to help get Brock Lesner over when they needed him to. That there is no purposefull burial of midcard talent by scared upper-card guys who are terrified at being outed from their spots. The midcard is kept down because people like Benoit, Guerrero, and Jericho just don't have the tools to be upper card guys and that it's their fault that they are against a bunch of veterens who have Vince so wound up around their fingers that they can job said midcard guys out whenever they feel like it.... Good! Brock Lesnar sucks anyway! His acting "sucks on so many levels"(no pun intended to you Jason X). Simple Folk? Hit my noggin'? That's just fine and dandy Paul (x2)? Burpin' and fartin'? Jeez! And all he does is suplex, suplex, boring resthold, suicide spot to get over with fans, F-5, pin. This guy criticized pro wrestling a few years back. He's only in the WWE because of his size. A lot of people blame the other opponent in Brock Lesnar matches (i.e. Holly, Big Show, Undertaker, Cena) because of how boring they are, but in actuality its Lesnar who's puttting in those "BORING" restholds that last FOREVER! He has done nothing to prove himself worthy of the title, so I hope he loses it quickly. Take this guy off Smackdown! Brock Lesnar ignores the fans(when I went to take a picture with him, he looked away!). Brock Lesnar sucks! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted February 3, 2004 You know what the most amazing part of the Austin/Benoit and Austin/Angle. Austin does most of the work. He's an awesome force in the ring, moreso before the first neck problems. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BionicRedneck Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Oh, easily. Benoit was half crippled in their great match wasn't he? And the Angle match? well, that's ALL Austin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Oh, easily. Benoit was half crippled in their great match wasn't he? And the Angle match? well, that's ALL Austin. The match in Edmonton, apart form the ten su-plexes, Austin MAKES that match. The Angle matches are like Flair/Luger '01. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Ghost of bps21 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 The whole "Austin/Lesnar money match" thing is a little hard for me to swallow. Sure he was slated for his monster push...and sure he eventually got over... But at the time he was coming off of a 2 month Hardy boy feud (his first 2 months in the WWE) and the whole point of the match was for Eddy to screw Austin and put heat on their upcoming match. I'd argue that since Austin was the face and Brock the heel, having that unclean win as backstory would have only helped a furute Austin/Brock showdown. I can hear the fans now discussing how Brock only beat Austin because of Eddy and how Austin will take him down this time. I can still hear the cash registers ringing at no less a pace than if they hadn't done the match. Brock hadn't become anything yet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BionicRedneck Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Yet everyone complains when Randy Orton goes over HBK via interference. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Ghost of bps21 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 No...people complain about Orton. I can't see how anyone cares that HBK jobs...its something he should do more of. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BionicRedneck Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Certain people (can you guess) have complained that Orton has beaten a top babyface like Michaels. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Yet everyone complains when Randy Orton goes over HBK via interference. Actually, it was annoying that Orton didn't realize "Brass knuckles" would knock someone out with ONE PUNCH, not 5-6 like he did. That was my only complaint. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Ghost of bps21 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Oh...well AS doesn't count. I hate Orton too...but he can go over HBK every day of the week for all I care. There are few people that are more worthless in my eyes than Orton...and HBK leads the pack. I could live with him if he just came out, waved to fans and laid down...but somehow instead of that I get: Goes over everyone, wins major feud against Jericho and somehow will find way into Benoits title shot at Mania. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest KidKrash Report post Posted February 3, 2004 You're an idiot. Well aren't you a genius? Damn, how does anyone ever beat you in a debate. You bring so many great points to the table. You never conjecture, add in your own stuff, or try and slander the people you're debating with. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BionicRedneck Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Aw...c'mon! He said Austin had a shitty year in '01. That's pretty silly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Ghost of bps21 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 I remember when the talk around these parts was that 2001 was a career rebirth for Austin coming off of his injury. He left a trail of great matches that year (some overrated like vs. HHH at No Way Out) some just plain great live vs. Benoit in Edmonton. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Austin3164life 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Austin was at his best in 96-97. Of course, he experienced a revival in 2001... The shittiness of his heel run, with him burying the WCW and ECW guys on a regular basis coupled with the fact that it took a massive terrorist attack to make Austin put someone over (Kurt Angle) after having him pointlessly going over just about everyone on the roster not named HHH made 2001 Austin's worst year by far..... If Austin had done the right thing and jobbed his ass off in 2001 to get Jericho, Angle, and Benoit over, it would be considered a revival. But as it is, 2001 was the year that everyone got their first look at what a selfish piece of shit Austin was.... I know, Austin's heel shtick was so terrible, all those fans had to cheer the hell out of him just so he could stop being a heel. And all those "classic" matches that everyone hails Austin for, everyone else was carrying him. I mean, come on, everyone's God, Chris Benoit, and the messiah of the WWE, Kurt Angle, made sure Austin looked like gold....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ray Report post Posted February 3, 2004 The shittiness of his heel run His heel run was not "shitty." He played the paranoid-obsessive heel character very well. The booking of his heel run was poor, and the fans didn't want to boo him. Get a clue. with him burying the WCW and ECW guys on a regular basis Vince McMahon was the one burying WCW/ECW. It was Vince's obsession with making "his guys" look better. coupled with the fact that it took a massive terrorist attack to make Austin put someone over (Kurt Angle) Damn, you must be TRYING to look stupid. Austin made Angle and Benoit look like gold. A wrestler doesn't have to lose to put another wrestler over. Oh, and Angle's title reign BOMBED big time, so they put the title right back on Austin. Get a clue. after having him pointlessly going over just about everyone on the roster not named HHH made 2001 Austin's worst year by far..... Pointlessly? If you hadn't noticed...Austin was carrying the fucking company. Rock and HHH were gone and he was the biggest star. If Austin had done the right thing and jobbed his ass off in 2001 to get Jericho, Angle, and Benoit over, it would be considered a revival. You think the biggest star in the company, and the man who is carrying it should job to everyone? Yeah, you'd be a great wrestling promoter. AND...he DID work his ass off to get Benoit/Angle over. Christ, you must have slept through the Edmonton Smackdown match and the Summerslam match. I'm sick of idiots who are always bitching about wrestlers needing to job. Austin was THE MAN carrying WWF in 2001. He SHOULD be the champ. He SHOULD be going over almost everyone. But as it is, 2001 was the year that everyone got their first look at what a selfish piece of shit Austin was.... And this topic shows everyone you don't have a clue in your head. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Ghost of bps21 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 (edited) "Damn, you must be TRYING to look stupid. Austin made Angle and Benoit look like gold. A wrestler doesn't have to lose to put another wrestler over. Oh, and Angle's title reign BOMBED big time, so they put the title right back on Austin. Get a clue." I can't agree here Ray. The booking leading up to 9/11 sure seemed to lead to Austin winning the rematch...and I don't know how his title reign bombed in just two weeks. The ratings actually dropped bigger when Austin won the title back a couple weeks later. On top of that...when Austin dropped the title the Alliance was left with no titles...which didn't make sense. I think there's plenty of reasoning behind the Angle winning due to 9-11. It really doesn't make sense that they gave him a two week title reign, had nothing for him, then went back to the Alliance Austin storyline as if he'd never lost it. Edited February 3, 2004 by "Hail" bps21 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slayer 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 If Michael Jordan raped a cheerleader, would people stop calling him one of the best basketball players ever? Obviously not. If OJ Simpson killed two people, would people stop calling him one of the best runningbacks ever? Wait a second... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Austin3164life 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Well, I'm not sure about the comparison in terms of ratings, but when I was watching Raw, I thought that Angle as World Champion didn't look right. His character was a mixture of Austin, Shamrock, and Undertaker rolled up into a dorky Angle. His first reign earlier that year (and late 2000) was better. I'm not blaming Angle, because it's hard to draw fans when your main opponent besides Austin was SHANE MCMAHON of all people. However, the "humungous pops" that I was expecting for Angle, I heard when Austin won the title back two weeks later, being a heel, and with interference. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest wildpegasus Report post Posted February 3, 2004 Austin knew what he was doing in the ring. There's no denying that. He was also a hard worker. I think the problem some people have is that his offence sometimes left something to be desired. Add in the fact that he used a lot of punches when it says wrestling on the card and that's where you get your Austin detractors. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted February 3, 2004 "Damn, you must be TRYING to look stupid. Austin made Angle and Benoit look like gold. A wrestler doesn't have to lose to put another wrestler over. Oh, and Angle's title reign BOMBED big time, so they put the title right back on Austin. Get a clue." I can't agree here Ray. The booking leading up to 9/11 sure seemed to lead to Austin winning the rematch...and I don't know how his title reign bombed in just two weeks. The ratings actually dropped bigger when Austin won the title back a couple weeks later. On top of that...when Austin dropped the title the Alliance was left with no titles...which didn't make sense. I think there's plenty of reasoning behind the Angle winning due to 9-11. It really doesn't make sense that they gave him a two week title reign, had nothing for him, then went back to the Alliance Austin storyline as if he'd never lost it. Face Kurt BOMBED and the blantant stupidity of turning Kurt into the very character he was originally a deft parody of led to departure of fans. He was so awful as a face that they had to interject RVD the next month in the hope that they could draw a buyrate with a face who was... you know... over. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Ghost of bps21 0 Report post Posted February 3, 2004 "Damn, you must be TRYING to look stupid. Austin made Angle and Benoit look like gold. A wrestler doesn't have to lose to put another wrestler over. Oh, and Angle's title reign BOMBED big time, so they put the title right back on Austin. Get a clue." I can't agree here Ray. The booking leading up to 9/11 sure seemed to lead to Austin winning the rematch...and I don't know how his title reign bombed in just two weeks. The ratings actually dropped bigger when Austin won the title back a couple weeks later. On top of that...when Austin dropped the title the Alliance was left with no titles...which didn't make sense. I think there's plenty of reasoning behind the Angle winning due to 9-11. It really doesn't make sense that they gave him a two week title reign, had nothing for him, then went back to the Alliance Austin storyline as if he'd never lost it. Face Kurt BOMBED and the blantant stupidity of turning Kurt into the very character he was originally a deft parody of led to departure of fans. He was so awful as a face that they had to interject RVD the next month in the hope that he could draw a buyrate with a face who was... you know... over. THEY KNEW THAT BEFORE 9-11. THEN somehow they put the title on him for two weeks. You're point only strengthens mine. So...thanks I guess. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
